On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 7:45 PM Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 9/18/26 12:52, Alexey Charkov wrote: > > print_decomp_msg() names the image it is about to unpack, which drags > > uimage_type[] and its strings into any phase that links image_decomp(). > > That is about 2.5KB, measured on a Rockchip RK3576 SPL, spent on one line > > of progress output in a phase built for size. > > > > Name it "image" there instead. U-Boot proper is unchanged. > > > > Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Charkov <[email protected]> > > --- > > boot/image.c | 7 ++++++- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/boot/image.c b/boot/image.c > > index 185d52ba492f..a7dc69e858ad 100644 > > --- a/boot/image.c > > +++ b/boot/image.c > > @@ -416,7 +416,12 @@ void image_print_contents(const void *ptr) > > static void print_decomp_msg(int comp_type, int type, bool is_xip, > > ulong load) > > { > > - const char *name = genimg_get_type_name(type); > > + /* > > + * The image-type table and its strings cost about 2.5KB, which is a > > + * lot to spend on a progress message in a phase built for size. > > + */ > > + const char *name = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XPL_BUILD) ? "image" : > > + genimg_get_type_name(type); > > > > /* Shows "Loading Kernel Image" for example */ > > if (comp_type == IH_COMP_NONE) > > > > The print_decomp_msg() output is irrelevant to end users. > > Do we need print_decomp_msg() at all in XPL? > Even for main U-Boot this should only be a debug message.
I believe it is a helpful progress indicator. End users would rarely stare at xPL console messages if everything goes well, and if they do stare at it (which requires having console output, a debug feature, enabled in the first place) they'll probably want to know where everything stopped going well without jumping through too many hoops. Best regards, Alexey
